ACI 318 vs. ACI SP-17

[PeonPE]

Is there anyone who is familiar with the ACI 318 and ACI SP-17?

The SP-17 seems much more design oriented in terms of the mechanics of concrete whereas the 318 appears on the surface to be more of a Codes & Standards reference instead of a design manual. That being said, if you look at the tables of contents and descriptions of the various chapters there appears to be a lot of overlap. Are they more or less the same?

I mostly deal with non-architectural structures (bridges, culverts, footers, pads, pre-cast beams and columns, etc.) I was curious if anyone had an opinion.

Thanks!

 

[CRNewsom]

ACI SP-17 is a "How-to" based on the ACI 318 code. It is not intended to replace the code and should not be used as such. It does have very convenient interaction diagrams and charts that can speed up the design process if you know how to use them.

It is a similar comparison to the tables in the Steel Construction Manual and the AISC 360 specification.

 

[PeonPE]

I am familiar with those steel codes. Great analogy - answers my question succinctly. Thanks!

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

What CRNewsom said. Also, use it if you're taking the SE! I used it for the vertical and will also use it for the lateral.

Pros:

-Very good layouts of problems with helping tables that allow you to do shear, flexure, and axial load design in very little time. Avoids some number punching errors as well, just watch those footnotes.

-Great seismic detail section, really helps with a concise reference for seismic details.

-Column tables, hooray!

-T beam design tables, hooray!

-Anchor bolt design in book 2 but I doubt we will such much more than basic problems with bolts on the exam.

Cons:

-It's based on ACI 318-11 (or at least the one I have is). With all the basic stuff it's meant for it shouldn't make a difference but this is definitely worth noting.
-Be careful you have the right table and apply it appropriately.